| Fighter_16 (Fearless Blue) | Thursday, January 5, 2012 - 03:29 am 
I know how to get a c3 and all that but only if its a neighboring c3 , However i do not know what weapons i should use or tactics i should use if its farther away..any suggestions ? |
| Keto (Little Upsilon) | Thursday, January 5, 2012 - 05:56 pm
Depending how far away the c3 is, you can use the same tactics as a neighbouring c3 except for land units.
With the range your airforce has it can reach alot of far away c3's, but you'll have to check distances on the map to make sure you are in range.
As for land forces, you'll need to set up an airbase in the c3, wait till its built and you can station land forces there. Airbase construction units are used for building bases. You'll need rapid deployment units and rapid deployment ammo to build these units. Another option is to take c3s along the way to allow your land forces to travel through these countries on the way to the c3 you are attacking.
Another option(using no land forces like HT and HA) is to airdrop special forces to paint with and use FP/bombers for air defense and defense at targets and cruise ships or LBCB's to take out targets after defense is gone from targets.
Hopefully this makes sense if not message me in game and I'll explain further and in better detail. |
| Jo Salkilld (Golden Rainbow) | Thursday, January 5, 2012 - 07:52 pm
For optimum performance, find a C3 that is more than 1,000km away and less than 1,500 km away. That way you can still use attack drones.
Airdropping Special Forces is the easiest way to paint.
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| Matt Patton (Golden Rainbow) | Tuesday, March 6, 2012 - 02:07 am
how far is too far
the twelve monkeys a one person fed attacked my slaves
but is on the continent over 4600KM
so far has made one lbc attack on a city I guess
I tried to attack but it just looked at the place
any way I deployed everything available |
| Jo Salkilld (White Giant) | Tuesday, March 6, 2012 - 01:50 pm
If a country is out of range, you need to use remote airbases and / or navy.
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| xiong | Friday, June 22, 2012 - 11:09 am
why not just nuke out the troubler maker? i would probably nuke every monkeys if some players like that would bother my empires 
last i read was strategic bomber was 30km range. 100% hit, 100% kill, 100% damage |
| Hanma | Friday, June 22, 2012 - 11:28 pm
...There is such a thing as overkill.
By the way, what the heck are the special forces units for, besides painting the map a pretty orange? |
| xiong | Saturday, June 23, 2012 - 01:38 am
it is to wipe out the trouble maker, close the account, or take over all his/her resources in that country.
he/she has to start over again, if want to make more troubles.
base on updates, the special force units are supposed to tag targets for you should you bomb the targets. this would increase the % damage to the targets. interesting concept? |
| Marshal Ney | Sunday, June 24, 2012 - 10:09 pm
Nuking a player is an extreme option. Depending on location, you're not just attacking that player. The fallout will hit his neighbors. Also affected will be any Enterprise controlled corps (or other country corporations -partially owned of course) in his country. Many CEO's also have countries, and might look askance at having their workers irradiated.
M. Ney |
| xiong | Monday, June 25, 2012 - 12:01 am
@marshal,
that's the consequences of using nukes, it may create a bigger war involving more countries should all the affected countries want to take actions.
perhaps the gm/owner may wall to introduce the concept that only the target country be leveled to 100% damage/kill, and no other countries be affected. this is not reality, but there are already many things in sc that are not reality anyways. |
| Marshal Ney | Tuesday, June 26, 2012 - 12:23 am
From reading in the forum, those damaged players can and have entered the fray on occasion. If a country were to nuke say Germany - every country around it would suffer. This is pretty realistic in that regard. |
| xiong | Tuesday, June 26, 2012 - 01:04 am
that's a reason for the gm/owner to designated that only the target country of the nuke be totally destroyed, without affecting any other country around that target country. sure this is not realistic, but so far many things in sc are not realistic anyway.
this wall-ing of nuke damages will keep every one else from jumping on the bandwagon of war. |
| Jo Salkilld | Tuesday, June 26, 2012 - 02:08 am
The reverse side of the coin is that, if a player chooses to use nukes, they need to think responsibly. They won't just be affecting the player they are attacking, they could be affecting a whole load of other innocent countries as well. And the risk they take is incurring the wrath of those other players ...
I'd rather not see the game changed to allow players to nuke without consequence ... or risk.
Having said that, countries in secured mode or WP are not affected by fallout. IMHO that's enough of a concession to 'unreality'.
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| Crafty | Tuesday, June 26, 2012 - 08:39 pm
Many times I've seen nukers offer compensation to affected neighbours. |
| xiong | Tuesday, June 26, 2012 - 11:45 pm
@jo,
nukes would be the faster route to annihilate the enemy. as on earth, nuclear weapons are to deter wars, but if the enemy is having superiority complex similar to japan on earth in world war 2 then terminate such ideology is the proper way to make the world at peace.
if war protection (wp) is already introduce, what harm is there to wall in nuke damages.
@crafty,
i think that's what usa/americ on earth offer to the marshal islander for testing nukes on their land. there should be no need to do that on sc if wall concept is introduce. |
| Jo Salkilld | Wednesday, June 27, 2012 - 02:54 am
Crafty ... yes, of course, you're right. Responsible players, if they absolutely have to nuke, will do that.
xlong ... no, nukes don't create peace. They are a just a weapon that responsible players think twice before using.
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| xiong | Wednesday, June 27, 2012 - 11:22 pm
@jo,
i thought on earth, nukes deter WW III because both parties are afraid for the lack of their existence.
being responsible would be playing nice, not enforcing one's ideology upon others or just warring with others just to bulling them. |
| Jo Salkilld | Thursday, June 28, 2012 - 12:46 am
xlong, SimCountry is not earth. In SimCountry, people don't really die from nukes. All that happens is that the '1's and '0's on the game server readjust, and your country looks different afterwards. That makes a big difference to how players use them. No one is afraid for their existence. If they lose population, they can buy some more, or wait for it to rebuild over time.
And if you have adequate nuclear defence, which is reasonably cheap, the nukes won't land anyway ...
Hugs and respect
Jo |
| xiong | Thursday, June 28, 2012 - 03:22 am
@jo,
just an analogy, that if both parties spent many earth months building their sc countries, then perhaps they would worry bit more about starting over again if either of them use nukes on the other or each other.
read that takes two defensive nukes to destory one offensive nuke? last time i check was nukes are above 10B sc$ each, that's not cheap on my ruler. takes a great econ player to amass that much money, unlike moi who's in negative cashflow and can't take over c3 yet. |
| Hanma de Hermania | Thursday, June 28, 2012 - 07:05 am
But all they got to do is use their plastic, and boom, instance cash for weapons. |
| Crafty | Thursday, June 28, 2012 - 04:34 pm
Nuclear defense is relatively cheap.
On SC, nuclear weapons are not the great ultimate weapon people imagine them to be. You need to be hit with several of them before they become a major issue. Nuclear weapons are not cheap.
You cannot lose a country to nuclear attacks alone
Wise up newbs, you've all been playing too many video games and watching too much TV. |
| Marshal Ney | Friday, June 29, 2012 - 06:42 pm
There go my plans to find a large cluster of c3's without any players nearby and massively cripple the c3 corporations with repeated nuclear strikes.
*sigh* back to the drawing board. At least the stealth bombers aren't proving too much of a hindrance. |
| xiong | Friday, June 29, 2012 - 11:13 pm
@crafty,
maybe the programming could be off then. the u/p atomic bombs on japan in ww2 is so much weaker than the current h atomic bombs.
in sc, last i read was that strategic bombs are h bombs, so what you're saying is that an h bomb cannot wipe out a country the size of a usa state?
if so then i need to re-learn science |
| xiong | Friday, June 29, 2012 - 11:16 pm
@marshal,
perhaps there should be restrictions after you nuke a nation/area, say nothing can be build for at least 100 years (game years) so that would deter using nukes to conquer?
anyways, what are the differences between precision bombers, stealth bombers, strategic bombers, etc... in sc?
again, i wish there are guides to these sc military stuffs |
| Crafty | Saturday, June 30, 2012 - 02:47 pm
xiong, I'm not 100% sure, but I would doubt any device could 'wipe out' a state size area of the earth. Even meteors with thousands of times the equivalent TNT force didnt do that. There may be one or two of the smaller states, RI or such that would be inhabitable for a long time.
Can we get one thing clear, IN SC, NUCLEAR WEAPONS AREN'T THE GREAT SHAKES THAT THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T USED THEM SEEM TO THINK THEY ARE |
| Hanma de Hermania | Sunday, July 1, 2012 - 01:56 am
But Crafty, don't you know that every player who don't have a nuke want a nuke because they believe just that. Me, I prefer a more conventional war over the nuclear one. |
| xiong | Sunday, July 1, 2012 - 09:55 am
@crafty,
sure an h bomb could or could not made to destroy a whole country in sc, depending on the gm/owner/programmer. just like sending 200 fighter jets to bomb a city, yet no causlties shown--not realistic?
i suppose my point is that if the strategic bomb is made to be the most powerful weapon in sc, then it should be designated that one of them will wipeout a country in sc. but again, there needs to be other variables to consider if a player is to nuke a country, such as that country will not be able to rebuild or use for at least "x" number of game years and everything be declared total destruction.
and make the strategic bomb so expensive, not thec current 14B now, but say in the 10T or more, so that only very experienced and economically strong countries could acquire them. also say your game level must be in the double digits in order to manufacture them too.
it's the most powerful weapon, yet just about anyone can get it....make little sense. also make it so that the credit card warriors cannot get it as well, and a player can only get it through skills thru the game. that means you cannot just flip out your credit card to buy several h bombs, make it that your cashflow must be in the high T which are generated from you skills in sc. |
| Crafty | Sunday, July 1, 2012 - 01:55 pm
Well, we could get into a long discussion here. A while back it was like you would have but then a new up and coming player called SuperSoldierRCP came along and reckoned he could make nuclear weapons by the score and make a profit out of them by selling them to any old n00b that asked.
Previously, owners, manufacturers, of nukes (which are extremely difficult to make economically), who were generally vets, would NOT sell to n00bs. The weapons were used carefully by people with good judgement (except Wendy, lol).
I told SS several times, as did others, and he agreed to stop selling to n00bs, but by then it was too late.
Have you ever seen the church of SC 10 commandments xiong? No? Then do a search for them. They are not rules but a very good (moral?) code to play by. |
| xiong | Sunday, July 1, 2012 - 11:55 pm
@crafty,
yep, read most of what scarlet has posted. the church does have some great things, especially their three areas of focus (econ, military, politics) and i was looking for more details of these but couldn't find them.
as i've mentioned, make the most powerful weapon so expensive that only those who know the difficulty of getting it will appreciate it. say if the requirements include that your country/empire must be at least 100T at the time you want to buy one and you must be at least game level 10, these would eliminate most of the noobs. and also make it that your cashflow must be in the 1Q (1000T) in order to manufacture them, then that would eliminate many more as well.
i'm a noobs and after couple earth months now, i'm still in the negative cashflow. at rate that i'm going, i might now hit those requirements in 12 earth months to buy or produce strategic bombs and strategic bombers. |
| Crafty | Monday, July 2, 2012 - 08:12 pm
I see what you're saying and agree in some ways. Maybe your requirements are a bit high, but...yeah.
Luckily nukes are not great shakes in most peoples hands, an experienced war player can use them to much greater effect. |
| xiong | Tuesday, July 3, 2012 - 12:27 am
@crafty,
if there are more effective ways to launch military gadgets in sc, i definitely like to know that.
so far i know that just pick your target, your qty of weapons per the selected unit, then click click click...
is there a aim/bino available that i'm not using? |
| Crafty | Tuesday, July 3, 2012 - 03:15 pm
There's more to war than that. Fight smarter it is said. Like for example, weapons deactivate if there are not enough MLM in a country to keep the officers there, so its easier to win...
Just one of many little complications that you will need to know. |
| xiong | Wednesday, July 4, 2012 - 09:14 am
what is "mlm"?
yes, still got a great deal to learn how to use the weapons/ammos of this game. if only if there was a guide somewhere. |
| Crafty | Wednesday, July 4, 2012 - 09:27 pm
The best guide/text book is experience.
You for real, what is MLM? 3 month you have been on forums?
LLW: Low level workers
MLW: Medium level workers
...
The rest you can figure out, I'm sure. |
| xiong | Friday, July 13, 2012 - 02:16 am
@crafty,
mlm = minimum level military? |
| Keto | Friday, July 13, 2012 - 02:25 am
MLM= medium level managers |
